Thank God for Mark Driscoll

NOTE: Since much of the discussion seems to focus on some questions about Driscoll’s continuationism, you might want to hear what Driscoll says, not just what people say he says. I have linked, at the end of this post, to a discussion he had with Douglas Wilson below. Driscoll is far from some wacked-out crazy, folks. He is a non-cessationist. He believes in the operation of supernatural gifts today. Listen to Driscoll, not just those who attempt to shape him as some kind of nut.

I don’t like everything Mark Driscoll says nor the way he says it. Not my style. I’m more suit and tie, traditional, old-school kinda guy. But I know this, the more I listen to him instead of just to his critics, the more convinced I am of this:

We’re on the same team!

He may not be part of our fellowship, but he preaches the same gospel we do, believes the same Bible we do, serves the same Savior and seeks to glorify the same God. And, for the most part, he does it very well. He is a theologically-sound proclaimer of God’s truth.

I thank God there is a man like Mark Driscoll preaching to lost people in Seattle who would never listen to an old fuddy-duddy like me. I might still want to wash his mouth out with soap sometimes, but this guy is the real deal and the Body of Christ is stronger because it includes a man like this.

Of course, his discussions of sexuality have been the flashpoint of the firestorm around Driscoll. Let me be clear. I thought some of the things he has said were over the line – inappropriate. And the directness with which he discusses sexual matters is discomfiting for me.

But make no mistake – he upholds the biblical standard of morality. One man and one woman, pure before marriage and faithful after marriage till death do us part. There may be legitimate questions about his approach and his vocabulary, but there can be no question about his fidelity to biblical revelation regarding sexual issues.

This next video is a case in point. He is WAY more frank than I would be addressing the same subject in Sioux City. But HE IS PROCLAIMING the TRUTH! He is speaking God’s Word. Argue with the method of proclamation. I might agree with you. But he is proclaiming truth clearly, even if we judge it as sometimes overly crass.

This video is strongly worded in places – but it is good, solid, biblical advice.

You will always hear criticisms of Mark Driscoll. I agree with some of them. But before you let people convince you that he is something different than he is, listen to him speak. You will likely not agree with everything, but you will hear someone who proclaims clearly the gospel, stands uncompromisingly for biblical truth where it is very unpopular and an articulate (if direct) voice for biblical morality.

Listen to Mark before you take the word of his critics.

ADDENDUM: There have been several references to Driscoll’s non-cessationist views. Here is a video in which Driscoll discusses his views. It is absolutely fine to disagree with him. But I think (again) if you watch the video and listen to his words instead of judge him on the basis of the filter of his critics, you will get a much different view of him.

I’m not a cessationist either. So, I don’t have a huge problem with some of the things he says. Some go beyond what I believe, but it is hardly as it has been characterized.

I might (and do) disagree with some of his vocabulary and the way he approaches some topics. His language is crass sometimes. But I’ll take him every day of the week and three times on Sunday over a James Dunn, Bruce Presscott, or David Gushee. I wouldn’t join his church or support his church plants because I’m a Sothern Baptist, but I appreciate that at his church Jesus Christ is proclaimed as virgin born, sinless, crucified, dead, burried, resurrected, and seated at the right hand of God.

I also would like to wash his mouth out with soap sometimes. 🙂

December 3, 2011 10:32 am

volfan007

I’d rather hear him preach than Benny Hinn and Joel Osteen, but the “I See Things” video of him seeing….in his mind…women undressing and committing adultery, and being able to see all of these things happening without really knowing that it did…AND, even saying that he’s told couples that he has seen one of them committing adultery, but that he’s been WRONG a couple of times….was enough for me. I mean, can you imagine telling a young lady that you saw her husband in a motel room with another woman; tearing that young lady up bad about her husband cheating on her; then, saying “OOOOPs?” Wow. And, he SEES these things in his mind like watching a TV? Wow, again.

But also, I cant figure out why he’d be featured at Southeastern Seminary so often, when he promotes Presbyterian Church starts? not even mentioning all the church fellowhships where liquor is served…telling the women to dress in red, smokin’ hot dresses…him seeing people committing adultery in motel rooms…I mean, actually seeing them…

I mean, fellas, I love Driscoll in the Lord. I count him as a brother in Christ; right now. But, I’m leery of this fella due to all of these things. I hope this does not turn into one of those Bell situations, where a lot of people are singing his praises, but then, all of the “new and different, strange” things turn into a flat out denial of sound doctrine, or even a denial of the faith, altogether.

I mean, I look leerily at Osteen. I count him as a false teacher already. He denies that Jesus is the only way to Heaven. He tickles ears.

I’d imagine that we havent heard the end of Rob Bell, either. Dont forget that he was a lot of people’s darlin’ before he denied the existence of Hell.

When I hear people like Benny Hinn, I dont just think of a Believer, who disagrees with me on minor, doctrinal issues. Do you?

I hope Driscoll will not turn out to be one of these guys. But, right now, I’m just not too sure about him. I sincerely hope he grows in his faith, and we see him leaving behind some of this wild, strange stuff. But, right now, I’ keeping a leery eye on him.

Anyway, may the Lord help me to continue to grow in my faith, that I may be all that He wants me to be. And, may the Lord help me to not go off into wild, strange, distorted beliefs that cause hurt, and confusion, and disillusionment…that cause other people to stumble. I pray that the Lord will give me grace to live more fully for Him.

I suppose it might be that preacher who will forthrightly address issues that some preachers are fearful to tackle, and especially so if they’re issues of great importance, will always meet criticism form those less willing to address them. I mean, I wouldn’t want to openly admire someone who did something I should have done, but didn’t, so naturally I’d be finding something to criticize.

I may be wrong, but I don’t recall Mark’s saying he was telling women that their hubbies were cheating on them in some motel. Only perhaps that he saw them. And I am again reminded of Joseph Garlington’s statement that some folks will maintain that “If it hasn’t happened to me, then it hasn’t happened”.

December 3, 2011 11:41 am

peter lumpkins

Bob,

Preachers I know are *not* afraid to tackle the issues Driscoll does. If yours is, I’m sorry. We preach the whole counsel of God, brother. Perhaps we may need to get out more.

With that, I am…
Peter

December 3, 2011 11:54 am

volfan007

Bob,

Go back and watch the videos of him telling people that he’s seen their spouse committing adultery. Then, he said that sometimes he has been WRONG. That it turned out to not be true.

It’s been said that, while we seldom mistake God’s voice for anything else, we sometimes mistake other things for God speaking (I’ve seen a lot of “fleece Cadillacs”). The utmost caution is required there, and I don’t associate that much with Mr. Driscoll.

Peter: I don’t doubt that at all, but that may be because I’m normally tied up at the church I call my “home church”.

Mark’s blunt tactics and preaching style clash with my Southern sensibilities. His continuationism makes me, with my cessationist position, cringe. However, as Dave states, he is a brother in Christ that preaches the gospel boldly in a city where I, as a rural Southerner, would not even get a hearing. Thank God for this brother and his ministry.

I completely agree, except for the not being a cessationist part of course!

December 3, 2011 1:35 pm

volfan007

Dave,

He said that he sees these things happening, as if watching a TV. He also said that he was wrong sometimes! What if Driscoll told your wife that he “saw” you committing adultery? Upset her terribly? And then, said, “ooops, I was wrong.”

I’m sorry, Dave. Even though I call Driscoll a Brother in Christ, and I love him in the Lord; I’m not very thrilled about a lot of things he does. AND, it makes me very leery of him.

Dave: there have been a few times when I have simply known something about someone I’ve been ministering to, that I could not have ever known were it not for the Holy Spirit. And several other occurrences have proven to me that the Holy Spirit plays an active, directive, and sometimes revelational part in our Kingdom work.

Who wants to talk about anal sex – from the pulpit ? Even child sex molesters use the same Bible and perport to believe in the same God. Southern Baptists are not that hard up that we need to claim this jerk. Even the “Birdman of Alcataz” wasn’t all bad .

I really don’t have any idea what your point is, Jack, but the fact is that most of Driscoll’s controversial comments related to sex are in response to questions people have asked him.

His theory is that if people ask the question, he needs to give a biblical answer to that question. He answers questions that would never even be asked in my church. But he’s in a different place. And, not to be too crass, but the sexual topic you raised is one that young people ask about. “What does the Bible say about….?”

December 3, 2011 1:23 pm

Robert I masters

I like the fact of his close association with John Piper and Douglas Wilson.

I would be happy for Southern Baptists to distance themselves from Driscoll a bit more. We love him in the Lord and wish him well, along with ministers in many other denominations, but we are NOT on the same page. He makes some of us merely uncomfortable while scaring the rest of us to death. A little space, please. Fewer speaking invitations. A bit more caution.

“Control” sounds pejorative. The goal is not so much to “control” him as to “protect” the flock.

A pastor in his own church is accountable to the Lord and his lay leadership. An outside speaker says whatever he wants. He’s leaving in half an hour. If he sees false visions, making him a possible false prophet, there is no way to exercise the kind of spiritual discernment that would prevent the flock from being led astray.

December 6, 2011 12:20 am

TheoS.

Rick said: “A pastor in his own church is accountable to the Lord and his lay leadership. An outside speaker says whatever he wants.”

In Driscoll’s case, he is not responsible to “lay leadership” because there is no “lay leadership” to be accountable to in his organization. He actually had his church bylaws rewritten to give him free reign and effectively total control. He also heads the Acts 29 denomination, with numbers of local Acts 29 churches (with a number of Baptist congregations who have joined as well) pledging their fealty to the pontiff in Seattle.

“Nowhere is the connection between Driscoll’s hypermasculinity and his Calvinist theology clearer than in his refusal to tolerate opposition at Mars Hill…In 2007, two elders protested a plan to reorganize the church that, according to critics, consolidated power in the hands of Driscoll and his closest aides. Driscoll told the congregation that he asked advice on how to handle stubborn subordinates from a ‘mixed martial artist and Ultimate Fighter, good guy’ who attends Mars Hill. “His answer was brilliant,” Driscoll reported. “He said, ‘I break their nose.’ ” When one of the renegade elders refused to repent, the church leadership ordered members to shun him. One member complained on an online message board and instantly found his membership privileges suspended. ‘They are sinning through questioning,’ Driscoll preached.”

Exactly Rick. He is a ticking bomb and if one listens to him a lot, one finds much to be very concerned about in total. Of course, like many, he is right on some things. I am always concerned that so many are willing to overlook and even defend so much that is worrisome and even vulgar about him.

I think he is much easier for men to take. As a woman, he scares me to death. The “I see things” video should be a wake up call for people that there are deeper issues here and they need to take a deeper look. What I don’t understand is why we give a pass to some like driscoll because he is right on some things. Bell is right on some things. So is Osteen. But we also tend to give a pass on consistent bad behavior if we think there is correct Reformed doctrine. I do not understand this.

Also, the coup he formulated a few years back to take over Mars Hill and his subsequent sermon about “going OT on them” was amusement for many but a neon sign warning to me. Not to mention his butchery of SoS and blaming Ted Haggards problems on pastors wives letting themselves go. Or asking about effiminate worship leaders. Or his obsession with sex in all forms. And no, if has listened to him for years, the obsession is there. It is primary doctrine. He knows he goes too far then repents. Then does it again, then repents. One thing that horrified me about him is at one conference he said that every single word that comes out of his mouth on stages preaching is from the Holy Spirit. I watched him say this and was horrified knowing his vulgarity and focus on sex.

He is not safe. And I fear for our leaders who promote and coddle him. I have heard every defense of him under the sun including he is willing to take on the “hard things”. I agree….in fact, he relishes it and loves it too much. In fact, it is basically what his ministry is about….a fighting mean Jesus who takes people out. Not the man of sorrows who wept when He saw people grieving. Driscoll basically has made up his own brand of Jesus to fit his personality.

If so, isn’t your real issue with Driscoll the fact that he is a complementarian and not an egalitarian? I seem to remember a blog discussion with you from several years back about this subject.

If you’re not the same Lydia, then please ignore the above paragraph. I would simply ask why he “scares you to death” as a woman? My wife loves him. I have used his teachings on the roles of men and women in pre-marital classes for years and NEVER had a woman, even women’s libber women, react negatively to his teaching. He does an amazing job of calling men to account for how they should treat their wives and raise their kids based on scripture. What about that bothers you?

Further, your analysis of the supposed “coup” at MH is based on very limited info…as in you weren’t in the meetings and you don’t know what was happening. Neither do I. What I do know is that if the guys who were asked to leave had been in the right then the church would most likely have fallen apart. Yet it has grown stronger and bolder since this occurred.

That’s the real issue with Driscoll. Everyone always has something to bring up that’s three or four years old that they read on someone’s blog somewhere. No first hand knowledge. Just innuendo.

I don’t filter my wife’s emails, but if some of the stuff that has been emailed to Driscoll’s wife was being emailed to mine I might, and truth be told she might want me to.

Do you seriously think that Mark just walked up to his wife one day and said “I’m filtering your emails.” I think your position clouds your judgment and understanding.

Now care to answer my questions above or do you want to just keep spewing venom and innuendo?

December 4, 2011 9:32 am

Lydia

Ok, Ryan. Here is how I think about Driscoll. I would hang up my belief in mutual submission among believers and become a slave if it meant young minds were not being influenced by the cruelty and vulgarity of Driscoll as “Christlike”.

And funny you bring up the comp angle. I know a quite a few comps who are terribly offended by Driscoll .
and quite concerned about his popularity and influence with young men and women. I know this because most of my friends are comps.

I have been listening to Mark Driscoll since 2002. A friend of mine passed me a bootleg copy of a breakout he taught at a conference for what would eventually become the Emergent Village movement. This was shortly before Driscoll left the movement due to the liberal theological positions being taken by newcomers to the movement- McLaren most specifically. The recording was very tough listening for a guy who was teetering on the edge of Orthodoxy- I was reading a ton of Emergent material at that time- Spencer Burke, McLaren, Pagitt- and swallowing up postmodern philosophy like crazy- Derrida, Foucalt, etc. Driscoll’s breakout was a wake up call for me and my faith.

When I started planting about a year or so later, I discovered Driscoll’s teaching on ITunes. Mars Hill was not the multi state monolith that it is now. They were in one building and were SRO for most services. Driscoll was teaching through Genesis. He spent over a year working through the entire book. This was a challenge to my preaching paradigm- verse by verse? Exposition? What’s that? Totally challenged my way of study and reading scripture. Did I mention I got my MDiv at SWBTS in 2003? Why had no one ever challenged me in this way?

The aspect of Mark’s teaching that was most challenging to me was his understanding of salvation and the Doctrines of Grace. I was a hardcore free will guy. I loved Mark’s focus on the lost- which I did not associate with Calvinism- and was flabbergasted and angry when I learned he was a 5 pointer. I had rejected Calvinism out of hand as an undergrad because of some angry and frustrating conversations with some “cage stagers” in class and in the dorm. I accepted Driscoll’s challenge to give that stream of theology a second look. I studied Spurgeon and MacArthur and the Institutes and most especially the Bible. I was convinced.

Mark’s ministry introduced me to DA Carson, John Stott, Tim Keller, and other wise men who take the Bible seriously and love people unconditionally.

I say all that so you will understand where I am coming from when it comes to being thankful for the ministry of Mark and Mars Hill and being dismissive of his critics. See, unlike most of his critics, I listen to a lot of Mark’s teaching. I don’t just listen to 5 minute sound bites or a controversial message from Scotland. I listen when he preaches on the Cross and debunks popular false teachers like Joel Osteen. I watch when he is invited on Primetime to debate Deepak Chopra and Carlton Pierson on the existence of hell. I read when he writes of his mistakes and missteps. Critics look for the one thing they can disagree with. That’s what makes them critics, because if you listen to the man’s body of work, he is on point and orthodox.

The other thing I find troubling is the knee jerk reaction of many in the SBC who reject Driscoll out of hand for his non-cessationism and his frank discussions of sexuality and his admitted moderationist position on alcohol. Driscoll has never claimed to represent the SBC. He is not interested in pleasing you or pledging allegiance to the BF&M 2000. In truth, I have heard him defend all three positions using the Bible and not a manmade document. None of those three positions can be defended using scripture- just the “Baptist way.”

I am thankful that Dave put up some snippets of Driscoll teaching in this post. None of them are “controversial” but all of them show Mark doing what he does best- teaching the Word and engaging the people who are hearing with Biblical truth.

Why that’s a problem for some is beyond me.

Finally, there are those who will bring up Driscoll’s moments where they feel he has “gone too far.” Let me ask you, have you ever said anything in a sermon you wish you could take back? Have you ever gotten done preaching and said, “I wish I could have clarified or used a different word?” Now imagine your mistake is broadcast not to 100 people but to 100,000,000 and the whole sermon is not heard, just the part you wish you could take back or fix. Would you want to be known just for your occasional mistake or for your hundreds of hours of orthodoxy? Think about that, if you are a Driscoll basher, and the next time you are tempted to be so critical of a guy who is seeing men and women saved and discipled by the thousands extend to him the same grace you would like to receive yourself in that same situation.

If Driscoll helped you to stir clear of McLaren and Pagitt and others of their persuasion, I am glad to hear that. I read most of what those guys had written for a seminar a couple of years ago and I was amazed at the heretical leanings of both them and others and a the fact they had such a following among guys I know.

So I think that is a good thing if he helped you there.

As for your comment about preaching:

“This was a challenge to my preaching paradigm- verse by verse? Exposition? What’s that? Totally challenged my way of study and reading scripture. Did I mention I got my MDiv at SWBTS in 2003? Why had no one ever challenged me in this way?”

The reason you did not get such a challenge during your time there was because Dr. Patterson did not take the reins of SWBTS until 2004. Had you been there during his tenure, you would definitely have been introduced to the principles of expository preaching.

One of the things I’m happiest about is the fact that at SWBTS, SBTS and other SBC seminaries now are promoting scriptural exposition over the “three points and a poem” nonsense I was taught at SWBTS in the 80s.

December 3, 2011 3:48 pm

cb scott

Dave,

You know I love you, but you should have listed SEBTS first when you speak of seminaries that pioneered expository preaching among Southern Baptists. This “other SBC seminaries” designation is insufficient. When you hear a Southeastern guy preach it is a walk away home-run compared to the “other SBC seminaries when it comes to expository preaching.

CB-
I am not a Patterson fan and I think he ripped the guts out of SWBTS with the professors he ran off, but I agree that the preaching department is definitely more expositional now than it was under Hemphill of Dilday.

December 3, 2011 4:05 pm

cb scott

Ryan,

That rather amazes me. Dr. Patterson makes administrative decisions at the seminary he was hired to put on course. Some were questionable. A couple were wrong. Most all were right. He did what he was brought to the institution to do.

Yet, he has never been profane in public. He has never preached anything that could be honestly argued as adversarial toward the marriage bed. He has helped literally thousands of seminary students and pastors through some very hard situations. He has preached the biblical gospel all over the world and if he found you hungry, he would feed you with his last dollar and go without if he had to in order to do it.

And yet, from many he receives vilification as a bad man among so many who really do not know him in the least. Yet, those same individuals defend Mark Driscoll for things that are obviously out of bounds, saying that those who vilify him do so because they do not know him.

Sorry man. I have no doubt that Dr. Patterson is a nice man and that he is an excellent preacher. He did SWBTS no favors in my opinion by running off Crutchley, Stookey, Sands, Klouda, and Bullock. Further, I feel my alma mater has been severely weakened by the beginning of the “College” not to mention the laughable “homemaking” degree that was created after his ascension to President. I have a good friend, a lady, who was a ThM student who started pre-Patterson. She was pestered by Dr. Patterson, Blaising, and others to drop the theology degree and to enroll in the MACE program.

I enjoyed the campus under Dr. Hemphill and felt there was a real freedom for professors to be themselves and to discuss controversial issues. That vanished in the last year I was there under Dr. Patterson.

Just my 2 cents…now back to snickering and shaking my head at the Driscoll bashers…

Think they will accuse him of snake handling next or passing out cyanide laced Kool-Aid? 🙂

I’m not computer savvy enought to hunt down the video on Driscoll talking about making the mistakes in his “discernmening” abilities. I did hear it, though. And, if I remember right, someone had this on a blog post that I read. If anyone could help out a “non-Geeky, non-computer nerd” to find this video for Dave Miller to see; I’d appreciate it.

For him to vividly describe adultery scenes is waaaay over the edge…and for him to “mess up” sometimes is way more over the top.

And, for Ryan, Driscoll is influencing SB life. A lot of the young, SB Pastors listen to him. Southeastern Seminary gives him a platform quite frequently. So, yea, he does influence SB life, which is some of the concerns that some of us SB pastors have.

I read some things on Mark’s blog and I wonder if that is what you are talking about. It’s not exactly as you characterize it, but he does describe one woman committing adultery.

No question, from the quotes I’ve read, I question some of his “visions” and things.

But I would encourage some of those who are bothered by those comments to watch the video at the bottom. Very solid theological discussion of the subject. He’s not some kind of Benny Hinn guy. He clearly prioritizes God’s Word and affirms the absolute authority of the Word.

December 3, 2011 3:32 pm

volfan007

The part I didnt see at Mark’s blog was when Driscoll said that sometimes he makes mistakes…that sometimes his “visions” are wrong. but, I did hear Driscoll say this on one of the videos. And, I heard it on someones blog post…where they had the video on thier blog post. Oh well, maybe someone will come thru for me in a minute.

My favorite line in Driscoll’s video on continuationism and the supernatural is one that will infuriate a lot of our Reformed folks. It is also one that I agree strongly with.

He says that many within Calvinism have practiced a “functional deism” – God gave the Bible and stopped working actively among people.

He says that some Calvinists have developed a new Trinity, “Father, Son and Holy Bible.”

I agree with Calvinism (predominantly) in soteriology but I strongly reject a lot of what I hear in Reformed circles on sanctification and on pneumatology – I think it is often inadequate and unbiblical.

Thank you, Dave, for this. Driscoll is one of the most unfairly demonized men in all evangelicalism. (Baptist Press, among others, has contributed to this.) He is one of the most brilliant communicators, and bold defenders, of the faith in the Church today. And it’s about time that someone stuck up for him.

December 3, 2011 3:48 pm

Lydia

For the record, my views on cessationism are much like Dave’s. here is a link to “I see things” video…..Driscoll enjoys the details too much, friends. It is a warning sign. This focus on unnecessary details is littered all through his ministry career.

Here is transcript if having trouble with video:
Video Transcript:
Some people actually see things. This may be gift of discernment. On occasion, I see things. I see things. Uh, like I was meeting with one person and they—they didn’t know this, but they were abused when they were a child. And I said, “When you were a child you were abused. This person did this to you, physically touched you this way.”
He said, “How do you know?”
I said, “I don’t know. It’s like I got a TV right here. I’m seeing it.”
He said, “No that never happened.”
I said, “Go ask him. Go ask him if they actually did what I think they did and I see that they did.”
They went and asked this person, “When I was a little kid did you do this?”
And the person said, “Yyyyeah, but you were only like a year or two old. How do you remember that?”
He said, “Well, pastor Mark told me.”
I’m not a guru. I’m not a freak. I don’t talk about this. If I did talk about it everybody’d want to meet with me and I’d end up like one of those guys on TV. But some of you have this visual ability to see things.
Um, uh, there was one women I dealt with. She never told her husband that she had committed adultery on him early in the relationship. I said, “You know—” (she’s sitting there with her husband). I said, “You know I think the root of all this—I think Satan has a foothold in your life because you’ve never told your husband about that really tall blonde guy that you met at the bar. And then you went back to the hotel. And you laid on your back. And you undressed yourself. And he climbed on top of you. And you had sex with him. And snuggled up with him for a while. And deep down in your heart, even though you had just met him, you desired him because secretly he is the fantasy body type.” I said, “You remember that place it was that cheap hotel with that certain-colored bedspread. You did it—you had sex with the light on because you weren’t ashamed and you wanted him to see you. And you wanted to see him.”
She was just looking at me like—
I said,”You know, it was about ten years ago.
“I see everything.”
She says—she looks at her husband. He says, “Is that true?”
She says, “Yeah.”
“He was 6’2″, blonde hair, blue eyes?”
“Yeah.”
Some of you when you’re counseling you will see things. I mean you will, you will literally gift of discernment see things. I can’t explain it. It doesn’t happen all the time.
Sometimes your counselee, they will see things. Ye—eh—there’s pa— I found this with people—ok, now let me—I’m gonna ask the demon questions. You tell me what they say.”
“They don’t say anything.”
I say, “What do you hear?”
And they say, “Nothing.” They say, “But I’m seeing stuff.”
“Oh, oh, well tell me. What’s that?”
“I’m seeing—you know when I was little my grandpa molested me. I didn’t know that.”
I said, “Well, let’s not assume it’s true. Go ask your grandfather.”
Grandpa says, “Yyyeah, when you were little I molested you.”

Grandpa was assuming they’d be too young to remember. So he’d only molest grand kids up to a certain age. But they saw it.
It’s the supernatural. It’s, it’s, it’s the whole other realm. It’s like the Matrix. You can take the blue pill, you take the red pill. You go into this whole other world. And, and, and that’s the way it works.

So I say—tell me everything you hear, tell me everything you see. And sometimes I see things too. I see things too. I’ve seen women raped. I’ve seen children molested. I’ve seen people abused. I’ve seen people beaten. I’ve seen horrible things done. Horrible things done. I’ve seen children dedicated in occultic groups and demons come upon them as an infant by invitation. And I wasn’t present for any of it, but I’ve seen it visibly.
Upon occasion when I get up to preach I’ll see—just like a screen in front of me—I’ll see somebody get raped or abused and then I’ll track ’em down and say, “Look I had this vision. Let me tell you about it.” All true. One I had—I was sitting in my office at the old, uh, Earl Building. This gal walks by. Nice gal, member of the church. This is when the church was small. And it’s just like a TV was there and I saw the night before her husband threw her up against the wall, had her by the throat, was physically violent with her.
And she said, “That’s it, I’m telling the pastors.”
And he said, “If you do I’ll kill you.” He was a very physically abusive man.
She was walking by and I just saw it. It was like a TV. And I said, “Hey, come here for a second.” I said, “Last night did your husband throw you up against the wall and have you by the throat, physically assault you and tell you if you told anyone he would kill you?”
And she just starts bawling. She says, “How did you know?”
I said, “Jesus told me.”
I call the guy on the phone: “Hey, I need you to come to the office.” Didn’t give him any clue.
He comes in and I said, “Dude, what’d you do to your wife last night? Why’d you do this? Why’d you throw her up against the wall?”
And he gets very angry. They’re sitting on the couch and he says, “Why did you tell him?”
I said, “She didn’t. Jesus did. Jesus did.”
. . . And there are some people that have real gift of discernment, and I’m not saying I’m a hundred percent always right with it, but some of you are going to have gift of discernment, and you need to—you need to learn to grow in the use of that gift. And sometimes people will hear things. Sometimes people will see things.

(Note–catch the part where he “asks the demon questions?)

December 3, 2011 4:23 pm

Christiane

Thanks, LYDIA, for the transcription.

December 3, 2011 4:38 pm

Christiane

‘Gift of discernment’ . . .

exactly how is that term defined among Southern Baptists ?

December 3, 2011 4:42 pm

volfan007

Well, here’s the quote that I’m probably remembering hearing, where Driscoll said that sometimes he’s wrong with his discernments….thanks to Lydia…

So, the scenario I was bringing up in my above posts could play out….he would be describing an adulterous scene that he’s seeing in his mind; telling your wife that he’s seeing you committinig adultery; and IT NOT BE TRUE! Wow.

A year or two ago, Ezell and the GCR were always good topics, but they no longer do much.

What is interesting is that about 3 or 4 years ago, the issues were baptism, ecclesiology, Wade, etc. Times have changed and there are few of us old guard around who remember those old times. I, for one, don’t miss them that much.

He describes a continuum from strict cessationist (most Reformed) and wild charismatic (Hinn et al). Neither he nor I are on the cessationist side. He and I are at different places on the continuum, but I strongly agree with his theology on this, if not his practice.

December 3, 2011 4:49 pm

Lydia

Dave, Please. He claims he sees these things in “detail”. And not just one but quite a few. Are you seriously comfortable with that?

Although he claims he is not doing this and throws in a few disclaimers, he is actually setting himself up as a sort of seer. It is chilling.

So, if he was ‘wrong’ as he puts it, was the ‘vision’ then from Satan?

I naively thought that when more Reformed people saw this it would be a wake up call concerning Driscoll and his long drama of bad boy behavior. I could not have been more wrong.

December 3, 2011 4:55 pm

Chase

The widespread acceptance of pastors like Driscoll seems to be a symptom of a larger disease within modern Calvinism. Here is a relevant article:

Due to time constraints, I was only able to get through about half of it, and will have to post a short response.

I disagree with Driscoll’s opinion of the consequences of cessationism. If the Holy Spirit is not giving people porn-o-vision and making them speak moon language, he is still doing that to which he agreed in the CoR; i.e., working regeneration and faith in the hearts of the elect, sanctifying them, etc. Indeed, believers experience his work every day. How is that unitarian? How would this necessitate a denial of the Trinity? How is this deism, when we acknowledge that God is continually drawing people to himself and forgiving their sins?

Do we place less emphasis on the Holy Spirit in the West? Sure, but the Holy Spirit witnesses to Christ, not to himself. If we want to give him more emphasis in the church, then his role and actions should be better explained.

December 3, 2011 7:25 pm

Ron Hale

Lydia,

Thanks for the transcript; in it he said:

“I don’t know. It’s like I got a TV right here. I’m seeing it.”

Dave … do you think that Bro. Mark has a TV set that he sees things through?

He also said:

“I’m not a guru. I’m not a freak. I don’t talk about this. If I did talk about it everybody’d want to meet with me and I’d end up like one of those guys on TV. But some of you have this visual ability to see things.”

Let’s take a survey … how many of you have “visual ability” and see things through a spirit world TV set?

Personally, I don’t even think that TBN would cover this story.

December 3, 2011 4:45 pm

volfan007

Ron,

I’d bet you a pot of cabbage with little pieces of ham in it, that if these things had been said by Joel Osteen, or Benny Hinn, or Copeland, then all the blogs in the Reformed world would not be able to contain the wailings and gnashings of teeth against those hideous, Arminian, charismatic charlatans.

But, if a popular, reformed, Acts 29 leader says these things; then he gets a pass. And, this is concerning.

No, David, that is my point – I think there is a significant difference. Driscoll is theologically solid and knowledgeable – not like wishy-washy Osteen. That is the significant difference. And it is significant.

The problem with defending Driscoll is that he says some really outlandish things.

I think the difference between your view and mine is pretty simple. You see the outlandish things as more characteristic of his overall views. I see them as sort of an aberration in a normally orthodox and grounded preacher of truth.

From what I have read and listened to, this man is a proclaimer of truth – on biblical and theological issues, on moral issues, on cultural issues and even on the work of the Spirit – who sometimes says outlandish things.

In a word No. They are mentioned in none of his books at all. They have been discussed in about 3 places I believe- an interview, the Spiritual Warfare sermon series, and a magazine article.

December 3, 2011 6:15 pm

Chief Katie

I really enjoy Mark Driscoll. Like almost everyone else, I agree that he is sometimes unwise with his use of language and maybe even too ‘out there’ for some of the topics he takes on. But you have to give it to him, the Bible talks about sex…. it talks about sex A LOT! There’s no reason not to address it within the church with appropriate attention given to time, space, and age-appropriateness.

Mark is still somewhat young. I’d love to see him being just as bold and forthright 10 years from now, with just the edges softened to make the delivery less… umm… visually imaginative.

Let’s be honest, Mark says the good folks in Seattle believe in salvation via recycling. They really need to hear the gospel. I’m thankful to Mark for taking on a very tough crowd.

“We are beggars all.” Martin Luther

December 3, 2011 6:29 pm

Bill Mac

CK: We should always be thankful when the Gospel is proclaimed. But some people do not realize how easy it is to lose your voice. This “I see things” video is not like an occasional lapse of profanity. This is either prophetic revelation, or tin foil hat crazy. Since Driscoll himself said that he was sometimes wrong about his visions (is that in the video? ), then it can’t be revelation. If someone accused me of adultery, in front of my wife (which is also just barking moon bat crazy) and then decided he might be wrong, not only would his voice be lost to me and my family forever, I may well take steps to assure that he was removed from any position of authority that he might have.

I know there is an urge to circle the wagons around a fellow Calvinist, especially in light of the rabid anti-Calvinists who are swooping in here for the kill, but this is just not defensible.

Simply amazing. He is reformed so he has to be ok. I hear Hinn is considering Calvinism. Only in America.

Maybe Driscoll will run for President!

><>”

December 3, 2011 10:42 pm

Chris

Where did Dave argue this? One could also say that he is reformed; therefore, rabid anti-Calvinists like yourself search for embarassing remarks or questionable points in his theology and ignore the majority of his preaching and teaching so that you can demonize him. Only in the SBC!

December 3, 2011 10:54 pm

Tim Irvin

I was going to say the same things that volfan007 said so I’ll save space and simply say that I’m becoming less and less shocked by the things I hear the SBC (Slowly Becoming Catholic) crowd lending support to.
You should be ashamed of yourself for giving this guy a platform to curse his falsehoods from. There’s a reason that a counterfeit looks so much like the real thing and Driscoll has passed himself off to many as being the real thing.

I’ve briefly plowed through all the comments on this thread and I apologize if I dupe something somebody else said. I encourage you to read two books by Driscoll: “Doctrine” and “Vintage Jesus.” I think you’ll get a real good grasp of the man from that. I challenge you to listen to an ENTIRE sermon from the man, not just a two minute youtube clip or somebody else’s blog about a small section of a sermon. If you are not sure where to start, look up the series he did through Proverbs, it was exceptional.

Has he made a few mistakes and messed up? Has he crossed the line a few times? Does he have a few views that are off? Is he somewhat crass at times? The answer is yes to all.

Has he successfully reached people in the most unchurched part of America with the Gospel? Does he preach relevant yet biblically sound messages? Is he a man that doesn’t dumb down the Gospel? Again, yes to all.

Let’s play fair. Now I’m not picking on Jared when I say this, I just want to give an example that some of his recent good posts have made me think about. We can say let’s claim the truths out of secular media, but then we turn around a rip a Christian brother apart when he says a few things that make us uncomfortable. That’s a serious and unacceptable double standard.

Most of the Driscoll-haters on this thread dont really care about how similar they are to Driscoll and how solid he actually is… they simply want to see snippets on You Tube and maximize the few areas they disagree in order to demonize him.

December 7, 2011 6:54 pm

Nate

The problem with Driscoll (and for us) is that we aren’t typically remembered for the things we do well, but for our mistakes. Now, having said that it would serve Driscoll well to own up to his mistakes, but his tendency is to continue to push forward.

The kings of Judah give a prime example of it is not how you start but how you finish. Uzziah and Hezekiah are kings who followed after David, but because of pride, etc. they ended their reigns on severe downslides. Uzziah (a leper for entering temple and burning incense), Hezekiah (trusting in his alliances instead of the Lord and showing the treasures of Jerusalem to the Babylonians). Even Josiah died by disobedience.

We have seen glimpses of Driscoll’s pridefulness (my opinion) in the past. Many of these could be looked past as youthful immaturity, but this last video is disturbing. To simply say, “look at all the good Driscoll is doing” without calling him out for this might only embolden him to think he is untouchable. Reformed or not claiming to see visions (like he’s watching TV), particularly sexual visions is playing with fire, even more so when he says that he is not always 100% accurate.

We should pray that men that he respects would take him aside and rebuke him.

December 5, 2011 2:08 pm

Smuschany

Several years back (like 15 or so) my father at the time was an alcoholic. He worked the twilight shift for TWA as a mechanic and so he would get off around 7am, drink, and then go home to sleep. Well one afternoon he was suppose to take me to the airport to fly and have visitaiton with my mother. I could tell he was still very hungover. I tried to get him to stop and just not take me. I KNEW if he was to drive that we would get into a wreck. This was not intuition, this was not an assumption. This was true KNOWLEDGE of a future event. Well what happened? We got into a wreck. Now I am not a prophet or a visionary or a seer or anything like that. This “knowledge” has only happened this one time. But it did happen, I know it was from God, and ever since then I have never been a cessationist.

And I think that is “part” of the problem with people’s opinion of Driscoll. He is not a cessationist, and many in the SBC are, and thus have a problem with that. I know not everyone here who has discussed discomfort with what Driscoll has said in regards to visions are cessationists, but I do believe that the largest uproar regarding this issue is due to this theological stance.

SBC folk just dont believe in “visions”, thus for them no explination of the events will work for them. Driscoll is dead wrong period, his who teaching then is suspect, all because people dont agree that he possibly could have “visions”. How many people in the SBC life have clearly had a gift of say “teaching” or “counseling” yet end up missuing those gifts? Could it be possible that yes Driscoll does have true visions, but because of the flaw that all humans have (ie sin, flesh, ect) he sometimes misunderstands, misinterprets, or misuses that gift? Does that invalidate his entire ministry? I should hope not, or if so every SBC pastor who has ever misunderstood, misinterpreted, or misused his own gifts from God also have their own ministries invalidated.

I am often caught in between the pull of theological strictures and the experiential – things have happened to me (unsought) that do not exactly fit what I’ve been taught.

So, this whole area of the supernatural is a difficult one.

I think anyone who speaks as if he has the supernatural figured out categorically is probably overly self-confident.

December 5, 2011 2:40 pm

cb scott

“…things have happened to me (unsought) that do not exactly fit what I’ve been taught.”

Wow Dave,

That’s really something to ponder. About this time of the year back in ’86, I remember another guy about 6’4″ said something like that.

He said God told him:
“I want you to use the medical school to put My medical presence in the earth. I want you to get this going in one year or I will call you home. It will cost $8 million and I want you to believe you can raise it.”

He also said that a 900′ Jesus appeared (not a vision, but a literal appearance) to him in person at the foot of his bed and told him to find a cure for cancer.

He never did find a cure……maybe you are going to take his place since you guys are the same height. 🙂

I just received a revelation that if cb doesn’t send me 250 bucks the crimson toads will lose the bcs.

December 5, 2011 4:13 pm

Christiane

y’all gone crazy . . . too much football fever, I guess

December 5, 2011 4:15 pm

cb scott

The crimson toads?

I really hope that does not catch on. But I have to admit, it is even a better slam than Buzzard-Eye.
🙂

December 5, 2011 5:02 pm

Christiane

‘rivet’ . . . (blush)

December 5, 2011 5:07 pm

Louis

I appreciate Driscoll’s orthodox stance and much of his beliefs about the Bible.

I have not read any of this books, and have only seen snippets of his sermons.

But when I saw the video of his “I see things” bit, it gave me the chills. I have no confidence in any person who would say something like this. He is either dilusional, or dishonest. I fear it’s the later.

I have read artilces from time to time in other publications, and he comes down strong on biblical truth and orthodox theology.

But he jumps the shark when he says the things he says in the “I see things video.”

I am not a ‘cessationist’ per se. I don’t think that is clearly position is clearly spelled out in the Bible. I believe that God does and has intervened in history in unusual ways.

Practically, however, I do not see the operation of some of the gifts described in the NT, the way they were described in the NT.

But that is not the question here, in my opinion.

People who are not cessationists should still be creeped out by the “I see things” video.

Some have mentioned balance. Driscoll does so much good and says so many good things – so this one crazy statement should be balanced against all that good stuff.

I do not agree. If our pastor said something like that at our church, I would recommend that he see a pyschiatrist and I would probably move to dismiss him, as well.

There are some things that are so bad and unexplainable that they disqualify people from ministry. And I believe his claiming to see things as he claims in that video is one of those things.

But God has not chosen fit to put me in charge of everything, thankfully, so I do not have to make this call.

But I wish evangelicals around the country would address this like they would some other issues.

This is a sign of creepiness beyond belief. He should not be allowed to say such things without criticism just because he’s not a cessationist.

After reading the comments, how many folks have actually seen the “I See Things” video? Not many it seems.

I sent my dad the link a while back to that video. His dissertation was on a famous faith healer named William Branham who saw visions (and most notably was a mentor to Oral Roberts, who my dad spent a good bit of time with, interviewing, etc.). His response was: “Wow, and this is really that Driscoll guy? The popular Calvinist?”

He thought Driscoll’s statements were quite extreme even compared to Oral Roberts and Branham.

Just on a more human level, what kind of person tells someone that it was revealed to them in a vision that the person was molested as a small child (and the person has no memory of that trauma).

If Driscoll’s visions pass and behavior can be justified as within orthodox belief and practice, then Southern Baptists definitely have a very GENEROUS orthodoxy. Maybe Driscoll and Hinn could team up. Driscoll could via his visions reveal previously unknown emotional traumas and then Hinn could heal the person…

December 7, 2011 2:27 pm

cb scott

Big Daddy,

If I said let’s put James Dunn or Foy Valentine together with Hinn to promote the Priesthood of the Believer, you would scold me with many words and accusations of demonically inspired meanness and heresy.

I don’t really know much about Mark Driscoll other than what I read here and a few other places. I have never read one of his books. I have read some chapters he wrote in a youth ministry book and it was very good. Actually, it was excellent.

Yet, I have read more than one of Hinn’s books and I know he is a heretic. I don’t think we can honestly call Driscoll a heretic. We can and should call Hinn one.

I do know that Danny Akin and some other guys I consider as orthodox in their theological perspectives have a pretty strong degree of confidence in Driscoll’s theology and presentation of the gospel.

I just don’t think you should lump him with heretics like Hinn, Osteen or Copeland.

And I guarantee you he is more theologically conservative that Dunn and Valentine.

And I’ve got a hunch that Akin & Company endorsed Driscoll without being fully aware of some of his more provocative interpretations and, in this latest instance, his “Pornographic Divinations”

After watching the video, do you think Louis was wrong to say that this mess disqualifies Driscoll from the ministry?

As to Hinn, do you believe that he is unorthodox, that he is a heretic simply because of what he has verbally professed or ALSO based on what he has done, his practices, giving thousands of people false hope that they’ve been miraculously healed, etc.

December 7, 2011 8:29 pm

Christiane

‘I see things’ . . . then he says he doesn’t talk about it, but he WAS talking about it . . . and he was being filmed

oh dear . . . that does not speak well for him, but in truth, in the evangelical world, where does one go if they have an ‘experience’ to talk about it?

my Church has experience with things ‘like this’ . . . there are trained people who will listen and evaluate with care

I don’t know if he was telling the ‘truth’ or not, but I sympathize if he was being honest, and this was the only way he could share it with people . . . kind of sad

December 7, 2011 9:39 pm

cb scott

Big Daddy,

No, I have not viewed the video. I will.

As to Danny Akin and the video. Naturally, I have no knowledge as to his knowledge or lack of knowledge relating to the video in question.

I do know that Danny Akin has personally chastised Mark Driscoll for the use of profanity (cussin’ ) in public and in the delivery of a sermon/s.

In addition, it is my conviction that Danny Akin seeks to walk with God daily and he does understand the elements of a biblical worldview and lifestyle.

Does he ever make mistakes about people? I know for a fact he made one regarding one man, but that was due to faulty/false/misleading information he received at the time and because he is a man with feet of clay like the rest of us.

Nonetheless, I believe that if Mark Driscoll steps beyond orthodox faith and practice and Danny Akin has valid information of such, he will deal with it accordingly.

Now, Big Daddy, maybe that is what I believe because that is simply what I want to believe, but I think I believe it because Danny Akin is a brother who seeks to walk with God.

I will speak to the Hinn question in another comment.

December 7, 2011 11:15 pm

cb scott

Big Daddy,

My statement as to the heretical personage of Benny Hinn is based on my reading of his writings and listening to him speak. The first time I ever heard him speak, he was filling in for his father-in-law, Roy Harthing (sp.).

I listened to him that night and knew he was way beyond the parameters of orthodox Christianity. (I told the person who had invited me to go with them to hear him that Hinn was a nut and his wife’s father was a nut also. That was the last time that person ever asked me to go hear their pastor or his son-in-law preach.)

I ran into Hinn’s heretical work again as a trustee of the BSSB (LifeWay). I found his books on the bookshelves of the our Baptist Book Store in Nashville.

I bought a copy of each book. I took them home. I read each book twice and constructed a document as to the heretical content within the books. My conclusion after reading his books was the same as it was when I heard him preach. Benny Hinn is a nut. (He is a nut that fell from a heretic tree.)

The next trustee meeting, I made a motion to remove all of Benny Hinn’s books from the shelves of any and all Baptist Book Stores and for them to never be sold by Baptist Book Stores again. The motion passed. Hinn’s books were removed from Baptist Book Stores.

(I had less trouble getting that motion to pass than I had getting the Sanctity of Human Life lessons put in all Southern Baptist Sunday School Material for the third Sunday of every January until Row v. Wade was overturned. Of course, we are still waiting on R v.W to be overturned.

My conclusion there is that it was easier to convince a group of Southern Baptist trustees that Benny Hinn is a nut than it was to convince the same group that abortion on demand is murder. Weird huh?

And I guarantee you he is more theologically conservative that Dunn and Valentine.

CB

I think Driscoll is a bit on the goofy side on some things. I don’t agree with him on every point of doctrine. But if I had a loved one on their death bed and I had no way to get to them to present the gospel again and the only person who could share it with them was Driscoll, I’d know they heard the biblical gospel that Jesus and the apostles preached–the gospel that saves.

If it was either of those crackpots Dunn or Valentine, I don’t know what they’d hear, but I know for an absolute fact that it wouldn’t be the gospel that Jesus preached.

December 7, 2011 11:39 pm

Louis

And let me add that I will stick up for Lydia here. I am not an egalitarian. And Ryan, you are right. For lots of folks egalitariansim is THE key issue, and can drive what they say on other issues.

But in this case, I agree completely with Lydia.

Now, on nearly everything else, Lydia is completely crazy because she doesn’t agree with me. But on this issue, she’s right.

I could say something about blind hogs and acorns, but I will remain a gentleman. (emoticon missing!)

December 5, 2011 3:56 pm

Lydia

Wow Louis, I don’t know when I have have been more flattered. (wink)

December 6, 2011 1:50 am

Peaches

I don’t agree with everything Driscoll says but I don’t agree with everything my mainstream southern baptist pastor says either. I love the man but sometimes he preaches things that are just wrong. He normally handles the word accurately but sometimes drops the ball. His heart is mostly in the right place; he desires to be more like Christ but sometimes he has been mean.
I hope that those who are busy nit picking Driscoll don’t want to have every word, every motive and ever slur they have penned to be dissected.

Well, if by mainstream you mean theoligically moderate then I sure hope not.

December 7, 2011 1:57 pm

cb scott

Well said Joe.

December 7, 2011 2:09 pm

Chase

I hope that those who are busy nit picking Driscoll don’t want to have every word, every motive and ever slur they have penned to be dissected.

Driscoll has voluntarily made himself into a public figure, with television appearances, a heavy internet presence, book publishing, etc. It is fitting for his actions to be held to greater scrutiny than most. What is important is how this is undertaken, not whether it is undertaken.

There are ways available for Mark Driscoll to prove without a doubt that he can see past experiences in people’s lives that he doesn’t know and about whom he has no prior information . He won’t do it . Why should he when his gig is going . And he can’t do it . “The King doesn’t have any clothes on”. You would either want to believe him or ; Calvinists have such a strong bond among themselves that they would support Driscoll if he only got 1% right in spite of his obvious mistakes . I would hope that the SBC changes its structure as well as its name and Driscoll’s church is not on the invitation list to associate with the new entity. Then all those that love him so much for whatever reason can also make up their own mind about what values they, and those they can influence are “willing to die for” . Prove it or find another playground. If he can’t get over that mountain – then he crashes and burns . Or we can ride his ship and “hope”.